https://www.britishpathe.com/asset/91213/
As shown in the link above, the bottoms of B-29 aircraft weren’t just made of thin aluminum; when you hit that part, you weren’t getting something like a hollow, leaky balloon.
Well we weren’t debating missile claims…we were debating the “cannon hole” size math that he pulled out of Grok and says is gospel truth. So how big are those holes?
LLMs (such as chatGPT and the others) are notorious for being actually terrible at simple math. They’re literally incapable of remembering something for more than 15 to 30 seconds now. There is an entire ocean of difference between an engineer inputting an equation they wrote up by hand into an old computer to calculate it for them and using a computer statistically hallucinating to do your calculations for you. Modern “AI” models are literally also programmed to pretty much always agree with the user unless you tell them that they’re wrong.
ChatGPT can’t do the rocket equations that a NASA engineer put into the old computers by hand with punch cards and magnetic tape.
2 Likes
So you’re stating now that all the fragmentation should only hit the mostly empty fuselage in a cone? That’d do less damage than it does now.
What’s the year of this report.
What’s the aircraft in this image.
The shell placement matters even if they’re “modern” rounds. Date of production does little to change their caliber when they’re still 20, 23, 25, and 30mm rounds. Realistically, a 30mm GAU-8 would tear a plane to pieces, but War Thunder does not simulate the degradation of components on that scale for bombers and only uses HP. There’s obvious flaws here, but the statement about nearby explosions is wrong.
You can argue to change that, but I’m telling you how War Thunder treats it in this instance.
3 Likes
The number of replies is getting a bit hard to track; it seems. I just woke up. I mistook your reply for him as one of mine.
Anyway, a bit of information you might want to take in is that altitude, especially 10,000 meters, drops the efficiency of a warhead to about 1/3rd what it is at ground level.
2 Likes
You can check these, and we already shared what we found above, but it’s clear you haven’t looked at any of them, as expected.
Not a B17, plug in blenheim numbers to the equation and get your answer. IN THE MEANTIME, someone came to me in private messages with concerns over my data with Me163 guncam footage, now that is a plane with mk108s shooting at a B17, perfect!
And Im happy to say my data lines up very nicely with it
Ok so here we’ve got a 30mm and a 50mm,
As you can see, the 50mm is way larger than the hole.
30mm fits quite nicely, but i will admit, the hole is ever so slightly larger, I made calculations assuming 100g of tnt, its possible it was the mk108 HEI shell with a little more filler, and or, that section of b17 wing over the flaps is NOT made from 2mm thick panels of 2024-T3, but the next step down at 1.6mm
we’ve got two scaled mk108 holes.
The “clanker” math adds up.
3 Likes
LOLLLLL ChatGpt solved an equation that had remained unsolved for 70 years by simulating it.
Are we still arguing about the 30mms, as if any guns actually dealt appropriate damage to bombers right now?
1 Like
It does not matter if it is a B-17 or not.
The damage on dev server would be the same against HE-111 wings as well.
So how big are the holes? Do they line up with your calculation that you are reporting as gospel truth?
Pretending those variables alone are enough to determine the outcome is a dishonest argument.
So yes, if the missile completely misses the bomber and only detonates because of the proximity fuze, I do think it should be capable of doing effectively nothing. If the bomber is outside the warhead’s effective fragmentation cone, then the explosive mass by itself is irrelevant the fragments still have to actually intersect the aircraft to cause damage.
2 Likes
Yes lol
2 Likes
“it does not matter if its a b17 or not” jfc, BRO. YES IT DOES. EVERY PLANE IS BUILT DIFFERENT WITH DIFFERENT MATERIALS AND SKIN WITH DIFFERENT STRENGTHS AND PROPERTIES.
YOU ARE LITERALLY SITTING THERE LOOKING AT THE MATH, AND THE COMBAT FOOTAGE, AND SEEING THEM MEET IN THE MIDDLE, AND CHOOSING TO IGNORE IT NOW. YOU LOST!
And I GAVE YOU the tools to figure out these questions yourself, Find the HE111 skin material and thickness, decide which area you want to shoot it, plug in the numbers for ANY HE filler, and then line it up with combat footage, assuming you can find guncam footage that isnt dark colored bombers being shot, making it abhorrently difficult to make out shell hole and bomber, do pixel measurements, create your to scale red sticker, and it will line up
2 Likes
Dude it will literally tell you 1+1=3 if you tell it was wrong to give you the answer is 2. Really shouldn’t trust “AI” with much of anything unless you are directing it with very specific information (something that the researchers focusing on the Navier-Stokes problems did, and openAI stole)
1 Like
While it’s true that AI’s hallucinate, you can ask them to show you their work. You can double-check their math to see if they messed up anywhere on your own. Furthermore, models like Claude are extremely intelligent (though I’ve never used it personally), and it was openly praised by some people I know in the STEM field for their consistent accuracy.
1 Like
Yeah, except my clanker was instructed to actually post its work and the process it used to reach that conclusion, while he went and made a graph out of nowhere with zero context
ye
Gaijin just made blanket bombers strong as hell.
Someone needs to test the betty bomber and see if it’s tanking rounds.
3 Likes
Would you stand 15ms from a 40kg explosion with nothing but airplane skin to protect you
1 Like
The debate is wether the plane falls apart, not wether the crew survives, the crew in war thunder is stupid, maxed out vitality lets someone survive a .50 cal hit, you know, the round that would either blow off your limb, or if you were wearing body armor that somehow stops it, the concussive force would liquify your organs
1 Like
Just tried out Claude for fun in this situation by making an account. It gave me a pretty impressive answer, honestly. TLDR, it gives a B-29 aircraft flying at service ceiling about a 55-65% chance of being flyable with an emergency descent.
Not gospel, but cool how much it explained about altitude, distance, fragmentation, overpressure, and such.
1 Like